USADA - Armstrong

[ChewbaccaD]

Based on my professional experience, judges will send parties to arbitration when there is a clear agreement between the parties that their disputes will be adjudicated by an arbitrator as opposed to a court of law.

And the SCOTUS cases that give them GREAT leeway to force arbitration agreements are pretty clear that they want arbitration in any instance where it is minimally feasible. Look on the fine print of that plane ticket you just bought, and see what happens if you have a problem you want to pursue against the airline. The number of agreements that people sign up for that include arbitration agreements that specify the exact details of the process, and your inability to challenge them is shocking...and courts ROUTINELY uphold them...to a fault IMO, but them's is the facts on that. In fact, arbitration provisions in contracts can be upheld even where THERE ARE DISCRIMINATORY PROVISIONS IN THE REST OF THE CONTRACT, so long as the arbitration provision does not appear to have been written with such discrimination. Federal courts want to force arbitration whenever they can, and contrary to this Outside reporter, I don't see this as anything special having read many cases involving enforcement of arbitration provisions.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

From the USADA athlete handbook:



The Federal Arbitration Act just establishes the basic legal status of arbitration. Arbitration is primarily a creation of contract. All the Act really does is establish how arbitration agreements and decisions should be treated by the courts - who the arbitrators are is determined by the parties to the agreement. If the parties agree to a particular arbitrator and method of arbitration, the law defers to the agreement.

Almost without exception...and this doesn't look to exceptional to me based on the cases I have read.

 

[Warhawk]

And the SCOTUS cases that give them GREAT leeway to force arbitration agreements are pretty clear that they want arbitration in any instance where it is minimally feasible. Look on the fine print of that plane ticket you just bought, and see what happens if you have a problem you want to pursue against the airline. The number of agreements that people sign up for that include arbitration agreements that specify the exact details of the process, and your inability to challenge them is shocking...and courts ROUTINELY uphold them...to a fault IMO, but them's is the facts on that. In fact, arbitration provisions in contracts can be upheld even where THERE ARE DISCRIMINATORY PROVISIONS IN THE REST OF THE CONTRACT, so long as the arbitration provision does not appear to have been written with such discrimination. Federal courts want to force arbitration whenever they can, and contrary to this Outside reporter, I don't see this as anything special having read many cases involving enforcement of arbitration provisions.

All true, with the caveat that in some cases courts have allowed class action suits to go forward when there are a large number of plaintiffs who have relatively small amounts of individual damages, as a matter of public policy. Obviously not applicable here.

 

[python]

The outside article is informative and well written. Props are due where they should.

Yet, in my view, it’s another attempt to switch the debate from the current focus - the exposure of a sophisticated, rich cheat who used his wealth and connection to avoid being caught and who exploited the ’system’ to the fullest (even the author admits it). The article attempts to deflect the debate from Armstrong wrongdoings into abstract legal complexities and the cheaters rights they themselves forfeited.

Yes, we care about the system fairness, yes we want the powers that be to play by the rules, but we also know that the ‘system’ isn’t (and can’t be) perfect.

If the system was perfect, the arrogant, rich, bullying cheat and liar like Armstrong would not be able to exploit it !

If the system was perfect, Armstrong would not be able to intimidate, suppress and ruin so many honest people who dared to speak the truth…

If the system was perfect, the doper Armstrong would have at least 3 doping offenses by now and be banned for life…

The system finally caught up with Armstrong and suddenly pontificators of all sorts demand a perfect system !

Jeeze where the moral purists were all this time ?

I call bs. This is nothing less than a doping apologism.

the apologists know too well they defend an ugly, arrogant, obnoxious liar who made mockery of the system.

Yet, suddenly they demand a perfect system… I don’t get this.

 

[PedalPusher]

2 points on that, plus an addendum.

First, arbitrators aren't bound by the federal rules of evidence. So, in an arbitration proceeding, you can get hearsay in if the neutral arbitrator considers it helpful to resolve the dispute.

Second, the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment only applies to criminal, not civil, proceedings.

That said, he might possibly have a due process argument there. I'd have to do some research on constitutional rights in arbitration proceedings.

Constitutional rights to due process only apply to arbitration if it was a state action.

When you agree to have disputes settled by an arbitration proceeding in your contract, you essentially waive due process rights. It is considered a private action with no constitutional protections, even if it was found to violate most core values of due process.

Basically some forms of arbitration (monetary awards/class action) require only notice and opportunity of hearing and adequacy of representation requirements overseen by a judge.

A party may ask a court to confirm an arbital award, which is then considered a judgement, and sometimes a judge may vacate or modify the award based on specific circumstances. But it does not review the merits of the underlying award based on whether due process was accorded to the parties.

 

[Warhawk]

Constitutional rights to due process only apply to arbitration if it was a state action.

When you agree to have disputes settled by an arbitration proceeding in your contract, you essentially waive due process rights. It is considered a private action with no constitutional protections, even if it was found to violate most core values of due process.

Basically some forms of arbitration (monetary awards/class action) require only notice and opportunity of hearing and adequacy of representation requirements overseen by a judge.

A party may ask a court to confirm an arbital award, which is then considered a judgement, and sometimes a judge may vacate or modify the award based on specific circumstances. But it does not review the merits of the underlying award based on whether due process was accorded to the parties.

/facepalm

I knew that... really...

Yeah, ConLaw not really my specialty.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

All true, with the caveat that in some cases courts have allowed class action suits to go forward when there are a large number of plaintiffs who have relatively small amounts of individual damages, as a matter of public policy. Obviously not applicable here.

You are correct, that was the type of exception I was talking about in another post, though if I remember correctly, there was a case last year involving class action and arbitration that made it much harder for class actions to be an exception now...I will have to go look through my BA notes...

 

[Warhawk]

You are correct, that was the type of exception I was talking about in another post, though if I remember correctly, there was a case last year involving class action and arbitration that made it much harder for class actions to be an exception now...I will have to go look through my BA notes...

If you find that case I'd be interested to see it. That was just something I remembered from 1L year, and I just graduated.

 

[alberto.legstrong]

"What is stronger, fear, hope or stupidity?"

Stupidity is just relentless. It never quits. At least that's what my wife tells me.

 

[Ninety5rpm]

Clearly, the disinformation campaign is having some effect...

On the public, yes.

But I'm thinking Sparks won't buy it, so what can they legitimately claim?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

If you find that case I'd be interested to see it. That was just something I remembered from 1L year, and I just graduated.

Congratulations. I have a year and a half left. I am older, and started PT the first year because I had a job too. After a year of that torture, I went FT. I am 6 hours short of 3L.

Hey, don't you have a bar exam to study for??!!

 

[Warhawk]

Congratulations. I have a year and a half left. I am older, and started PT the first year because I had a job too. After a year of that torture, I went FT. I am 6 hours short of 3L.

Hey, don't you have a bar exam to study for??!!

I'm multi-tasking.

Working on a corporations outline at the moment. Taking it in New York.

 

[alberto.legstrong]

There are reasons for everything that Lance’s legal team have done so far. They have a plan otherwise they would not be so good at their law practice. Just wait and see how this will unfold. It is only the first quarter of the game, not even have half time yet.
I read here in the small echo chamber that people expect Lance to fold. That is far from what is about to happen. Usada made default punishment against the doctors but why would those doctors waist any money trying to defend themselves in a procedure that is a witch hunt and kangaroo court?
“Knowledge is power, community is strength and positive attitude is everything”

I want you to know I don't think he will ever fold and I am glad for it. He has been dying this slow death by 1,000 cuts for years and, really, it's just fun for me to watch. I love watching a bully have to eat his own $**t. I think everyone does whether they want to admit or not, and if this goes on for years, I am ready with my popcorn. He's earned it.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I'm multi-tasking.

Working on a corporations outline at the moment. Taking it in New York.

Good luck!! NY is a beast from what we are told. I am either going for the NC/SC double...or listen to my wife and a friend I have in school and take Hawaii...I may also go for a LL.M in tax instead of taking the bar right out of school. We'll see...

 

[Deagol]

RE: "College" (if it really is him)

from The Guardian.

"If Lance senses the slightest hint of disloyalty or lack of dedication, you're gone. 'The world is black-and-white to him,' says {name witheld}, 36, an old friend who now sells insurance for a living. 'And it's a lot easier to make decisions when it's that way."

..... Armstrong was astonished that {name witheld} had stood up for him, and rekindled their friendship by flying him over for the last week of the Tour.



Wow, does anyone expect this guy to be unbiased? "Loyalty" bought & paid for....

 

[Kender]

that looks more like greg lemond than lance armstrong

 

[PedalPusher]

No worries! I aced it

Loved ConLaw, always have since waaayyyy back, but we all get rusty sometimes!

As long as we can sift through the BS that the sociopath and his legal team put out!

 

[steelciocc]

I'm just glad to see that Mr College finally agreed to add seven asterisks to Strongarm's record:

College's Signature - Lance Armstrong 7 time Tour De France Champion *******

 

[PedalPusher]

/facepalm

I knew that... really...

Yeah, ConLaw not really my specialty.

No worries! I aced it

Loved ConLaw, always have since waaayyyy back, but we all get rusty sometimes!

As long as we can shift through the BS that the spin doctor and his legal team put out!

 

[mewmewmew13]

I want you to know I don't think he will ever fold and I am glad for it. He has been dying this slow death by 1,000 cuts for years and, really, it's just fun for me to watch. I love watching a bully have to eat his own $**t. I think everyone does whether they want to admit or not, and if this goes on for years, I am ready with my popcorn. He's earned it.

I agree with your post a.l

I am finding it quite entertaining and join virtually with all of you out there that are getting their popcorn ready.

 

[Kender]

I have a question - what has changed for Armstrong since that interview he did last month where he said he wasnt going to "fight" any USADA claim?

Old habits?

he was formally charged by USADA. he obviously thought he'd got away with it after the fed dropped their case. Didn't think USADA was going to come for him

 

[Microchip]

that looks more like greg lemond than lance armstrong

That's Mark Fabiani and Tim Herman - Lance's lawyers.

 

[egtalbot]

Following this thread and situation with interest. I can share this from my own experience in the USADA testing pool in 2005 - they had to ask permission to come into my house to take urine sample. Which I granted

Unless they had a warrant from a judge, I'm sure they wouldn't have expected to be able to come in for a search, which is not to say they wouldn't have asked.

I'm not completely clear on what a refusal to allow them in my house for either a sample or a search would have triggered. But whatever it was, I signed a contract agreeing to it. To get around whatever penalty they imposed, I'd have to convince a court that the contract shouldn't apply. I wouldn't be the first person to try this approach, but if I succeeded, I'd be the first person to do so in recent memory.

It strikes me that what a lot of others have said on this thread is correct - unless he has an angle we don't know about, the only way LA wins any kind of court case along the lines of what he's trying is if he essentially convinces a court to kill USADA. He really doesn't appear to have any legitimate unique reason why he - as opposed to all the other athletes governed by USADA - should be exempt.

 

[Kender]

OK, but suppose we’re roommates, live together in some relationship. They can come into the house without my permission, can’t they, to search for something pertaining to him? The point I’m trying to make is that they don’t need a search warrant to enter his property, so inevitably innocent people may get caught up in this.

Again, if you’re living with a criminal, at least they have to have a search warrant, and probably you should know that your roommate is a criminal. But if you are living with an athlete, neither he nor you is doing anything illegal, yet without a search warrant they can come into a house that is partly your property. Once in there, they aren’t going to distinguish his stuff from yours.

they can't and don't search houses. All they can do is show up at appointed times and take doping test samples (blood/urine). If they want to search the property they give the evidence they have of doping to the police who can then act on it.

 

[Ninety5rpm]

Amended complaint filed:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99740088/Lance-Armstrong-Amended-Complaint